House Speaker Mike Johnson describes himself as a Christian before anything else. He has said his “faith informs everything I do.” He has told people curious about his views to “pick up a Bible.” His wife reportedly runs a counseling service whose operating agreement, which he himself notarized, states, “We believe and the Bible teaches that any form of sexual immorality, such as adultery…is sinful and offensive to God.” He has said he and his son use a software program called Covenant Eyes to ensure neither is looking at porn.

Given all this, you may think that Johnson would not be comfortable showing up to a criminal trial to defend a guy who allegedly had an affair with an adult film star (according to the adult film star anyway, though Trump denies it), paid her to stay quiet about the alleged affair, and then was accused of covering up said payment. But you would think wrong!

On Tuesday, Johnson attended Donald Trump’s hush money trial in Manhattan, where—prior to the proceedings getting underway—the congressional leader nodded approvingly at Trump from behind a metal barrier, like a groupie at his favorite band’s concert.

  • ghterve@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    How do you think they just skipped the parts where they would state the actual alleged crimes? They in fact didn’t skip that part.

      • nick@campfyre.nickwebster.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s falsifying business records, which becomes a felony when combined with it being a campaign finance violation.

        Not as strong of a case as the docs one but it is a crime.

        • Cincinnatus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          Right, that’s why the FEC and Braggs office declined to prosecute the case already, and then wouldn’t ya know, campaign season rolls around and all the sudden it’s being prosecuted. I’m just not that naive. I see it for what it is although I do expect a guilty verdict to come and then to get overturned on appeal

          • ghterve@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            You’re just imagining facts that are convenient to what you want to think but are not true. This case has been in the works for years. It didn’t just happen recently all of the sudden because it is election season.

            • Cincinnatus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yeah, it was in the works before and 2 courts declined to prosecute it, one being the very court that it’s being tried in now, the other being the Federal Election Commission. I’m not imagining anything. That’s just the facts bud